IPCC, CRU Climate Science Product of Public Relations and Peer Review

It’s coincidence that Public Relations (PR) and Peer Review (PR) have the same initials, but apparently there’s a connection in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Climatic Research Unit (CRU) science. Their science was politically driven, which is likely why they use PR companies to counteract problems. Repeated patterns and comments in official climate science suggest orchestration. Requests for debates are invariably rejected with “the debate is over.” Every time a problem appeared, public relations people appeared and strategized a defence, usually to divert from the problem. When the emails were leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) a public relations person was engaged. Website Desmogblog is the brainchild of James Hoggan, Board Chairman of the David Suzuki Foundation and President of a PR firm. In a December 2011 email to Mann, DeSmogBlog writer Richard Littlemore says,

…(as I am sure you have noticed: we’re all about PR here, not much about science).

Evidence it’s a PR battle is Mike Mann’s 2004 email to CRU Director Phil Jones. Confronted by challenging questions, they apparently developed a defensive mentality.

I’ve personally stopped responding to these, they’re going to get a few of these op-ed pieces out here and there, but the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing (sic) the PR battle. That’s what the site is about. By the way, Gavin did come up w/ the name!

The “site” is the web site RealClimate, named by Gavin (Schmidt). But science doesn’t need PR, so why do climate scientists need it?

Read more: http://drtimball.com/2012/ipcc-cru-climate-science-product-of-public-relations-and-peer-review/